Revised...

The winner of the fabulous free dinner is…Sir Gawain and the Green Knight! Certainly Beowulf is a very close runner up; but as much as I truly enjoyed Beowulf, the complexity of the structure in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight is the prize worthy component. It is highly probable that I would grant the dinner to the poet of Sir Gawain because I spent a considerable amount of time writing my research paper on this “tale.” However, putting my personal bias aside, and considering some scholars’ opinions that The Nun’s Priest’s Tale from the actual competition should receive the prize, I feel that I can justify my decision in favor of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight.

Sir John— The Nun’s Priest—might argue that his tale is just as complex and intricate [DASH APPOSITIVE]. He employs witty mock heroic elements to ridicule the Prioress while also sending a warning to himself about his pride. Structures intertwining, the tale of Sir Gawain beats the Nun’s Priest tale [NOUN ABSOLUTE-not very effective, but I couldn’t figure out where to do it.]

The author of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight has a knack for braiding in small plots that have the can stand on their own, but they become united through the intertwining and the reoccurring triadic structure. Although the poem is divided into four parts, there are three main sections: the set up of the game and Gawain’s year at Camelot, the exchange game at Bertilak’s castle, and the final encounter with the Green Knight [COLON APPOSTIVE?]. The braiding of the three temptations and hunts into the overall quests ultimately unites and strengthens the poem. These methods gives it the necessary edge over its rival tales, The Canterbury Tales and Beowulf [COMMA APPOSITIVE]. If the temptations and hunting scenes would have been left out, the tale could have easily resembled Beowulf in its more simplistic heroic/adventure structure.

I claim that structure is the winning factor because it is so intricate and complex, but what is the evidence of this? The outer two sections of the poem (the “set up” and the “final encounter”) serve as the framework to the challenge at Bertilak’s castle [PARANTHESIS APPOSITIVE]. Within Bertilak’s castle the challenges, the three temptations, are a triple threat. The dissection doesn’t end there. Within each of the three challenges, or temptations, is another triple structure set up. There is the temptation in the bedroom, the hosts hunting challenges, and then the exchange of gifts which may seem like a resolution at first but also becomes a challenge. It is a complex structure that is organized in sets of three and becomes more detailed the more you unravel it, like unwrapping the gift inside a gift.

The organization using threes is the crucial glue that holds the structure together and allows the intricate pattern to be successful (claiming victory in the dinner challenge). These repeated triple structure in the Bertilak Castle scenes are carried over into the outer section of the framework, Gawain’s final encounter with the Green Knight. Receiving three “blows” to the neck, Gawain gets his punishment for the three challenges at Bertilak’s Castle [PRESENT PARTICIPLE]. This subtly ties together the complexity of the challenges in the previous scenes.

The tale of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, complex and detailed, is still a tale that can be read for mere pleasure [ADJECTIVE OUT OF ORDER]. It isn’t until you go beyond the outside layer of the poem that you find the intricate structure which pieces all the elements of the tale together in a distinguishable triadic system. Organized with these multifaceted scenes, the tale stands out from its competition [PAST PARTICIPLE].

Therefore, I can confidently and justifiably announce that the winner of my home-cooked steak and potato dinner (with peach cobbler dessert) is the tale of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight!

I’m having a hard time identifying passive voice verbs to change. I think I got a couple, but I’m not sure? Will who ever read this help?

A Casual Academic Response...

The winner of the fabulous free dinner is…Sir Gawain and the Green Knight! Certainly Beowulf is a very close runner up; but as much as I truly enjoyed Beowulf, the complexity of the structure in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight is the prize worthy component. It is highly probable that I would grant the dinner to the poet of Sir Gawain because I spent a considerable amount of time writing my research paper on this “tale.” However, putting my personal bias aside, and considering some scholars’ opinions that The Nun’s Priest’s Tale from the actual competition should receive the prize, I feel that I can justify my decision in favor of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight..

Sir John— The Nun’s Priest—might argue that his tale is just as complex and intricate [DASH APPOSITIVE]. Yes, he does employ witty mock heroic elements to ridicule the Prioress while also sending a warning to himself about his pride. But that is not enough to beat out the intertwining structure in the tale of Sir Gawain.

The author of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight has a knack for braiding in small plots that have the capabilities to stand on their own, but they become united through the intertwining and the reoccurring triadic structure. Although the poem is divided into four parts, there are three main sections: the set up of the game and Gawain’s year at Camelot, the exchange game at Bertilak’s castle, and the final encounter with the Green Knight [COLON APPOSTIVE?]. There is also the braiding of the three temptations and hunts into the overall quest that ultimately unites and strengthens the poem and gives it the necessary edge over its rival tales, The Canterbury Tales and Beowulf [COMMA APPOSITIVE]. If the temptations and hunting scenes would have been left out, the tale could have easily resembled Beowulf in its more simplistic heroic/adventure structure.

I claim that structure is the winning factor because it is so intricate and complex, but what is the evidence of this? The outer two sections of the poem (the “set up” and the “final encounter”) serve as the framework to the challenge at Bertilak’s castle [PARANTHESIS APPOSITIVE]. Within Bertilak’s castle the challenges, the three temptations, are a triple threat. The dissection doesn’t end there. Within each of the three challenges, or temptations, is another triple structure set up. There is the temptation in the bedroom, the hosts hunting challenges, and then the exchange of gifts which may seem like a resolution at first but also becomes a challenge. It is a complex structure that is organized in sets of three and becomes more detailed the more you unravel it, like unwrapping the gift inside a gift.

The organization using threes is the crucial glue that holds the structure together and allows the intricate pattern to be successful (claiming victory in the dinner challenge). These repeated triple structure in the Bertilak Castle scenes are carried over into the outer section of the framework, Gawain’s final encounter with the Green Knight. Receiving three “blows” to the neck, Gawain gets his punishment for the three challenges at Bertilak’s Castle [PRESENT PARTICIPLE]. This subtly ties together the complexity of the challenges in the previous scenes.

The tale of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, complex and detailed, is still a tale that can be read for mere pleasure [ADJECTIVE OUT OF ORDER]. It isn’t until you go beyond the outside layer of the poem that you find the intricate structure which pieces all the elements of the tale together in a distinguishable triadic system. Organized with these multifaceted scenes, the tale stands out from its competition [PAST PARTICIPLE].

Therefore, I can confidently and justifiably announce that the winner of my home-cooked steak and potato dinner (with peach cobbler dessert) is the tale of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight!

The Fictional Story of Dora...

I think that I forgot this article was about at fictional character, so I found myself really inspired with the teacher’s methods. One of the things mentioned in the discussion was: Dora was stubborn at times. She knew what the teacher wanted, but she was sure the way she was doing it was right. I didn’t even notice the way Dora was reacting because I was so focused and intrigued by the teacher. I’m glad this aspect was brought up, so I can be aware of the stubborn (thinking they’re correct) reaction to learning new things. I won’t be able to help if I don’t even recognize it.

The funny thing is, Thursday at rowing practice I experienced the same stubbornness that Dora felt. My coaches were telling me that my blade was too deep, and the strokes that I thought were horrible (felt like my blade was half in), were actually correct. I had a meeting with the coach the next day and we discovered what was making me think that I was rowing weirdly when I was rowing correctly. ALTHOUGH we figured out my thought process, the next day I still didn’t want to do the uncomfortable (correct) way. I wanted to keep doing what I was familiar with even if they told me it was wrong. It struck me that I was going through the same process as Dora. I think this situation goes to show that the learning stages of Dora don’t just apply to younger kids, but can be seen throughout all ages.

I might have seemed naïve when I said that the teacher’s methods didn’t make Dora feel discouraged. But I stand by what I said, and I’ll explain. I mentioned that in high school I didn’t feel confident with my grammar because I got comments on my paper over and over, but never was explained how to fix them. Yes, I would definitely feel discouraged finding out that what I thought was great writing was actually incorrect. The thing that Dora’s teacher did was she affirmed Dora and didn’t throw everything at her at once. Gradually she pointed something out to Dora and guided her in self-discovery. Through this support the teacher managed Dora’s discouragement with patience and affirmation. Letting Dora learn to believe for herself in the changes she was making.

QUESTION: I’m not sure if I have any questions that weren’t discussed in the group on Thursday. I was amazed how many of us, including myself, couldn’t remember actually learning to write. I wonder if we actually did experience things similar to Dora’s story, but looking back from an extended time gap we have forgotten the process we experienced. Will the “fictional” Dora also forget? (haha – sorry that was a weak question, but my mind is drawing blanks.)

Making Sense of Things...

The magnetic sentence exercise that carried from Tuesday on to Thursday was probably the most helpful exercise for me this week. We had been talking about linking verbs, verb intransitives and verb transitive’s in class but I felt like my head was spinning. This exercise really helped me put into practice and struggle on what I was trying to understand. I feel like you have to just dive in and get messy with sentences in order to grasp the concepts. Here is what I learned:

Linking Verbs: The easiest way for me to remember if it’s considered a linking verb is if I use the equal sign. Does subject = description. The description part is considered the subject complement; which means it COMPLETES the subject. An example of this is, “Sally looks pretty.” When deciding if it’s a linking verb I simply place an equal sign in and see if it makes sense, sally =pretty; It works! ( I Hope that semi-colon worked?) I need practice on this pattern of the week…

Intransitive Verbs: The sentence will still work if nothing comes after the verb. This is the one I was having trouble with last week, but now I feel more confident in identifying intransitive verbs. So I could say that, “The carolers sang… a new Christmas song.” Sang, is an intransitive verb because the sentence can stop after, “The carolers sang.” The second part of the sentence is modifying and can be left out.

Transitive Verbs: These have to have a direct object after the verb. The sentence contains a subject, verb transitive and direct object, for example: John ate carrots.

Not only did we clarify the world of verbs by using magnetic sentences, we also recognized simple and compound sentences. I’ve been finding that a lot of these concepts I assumed I knew, but to be honest I don’t ever remember learning them.

- The boy laughed (+) and cried. = this is a simple sentence and compound verb.

- The boy laughed; the girl cried. = This is a compound sentence because it is two separate clauses.

- The boy laughed, and the girl cried. = Compound sentence

On a last note: I really liked the FANBOYS acronym for coordinating conjunctions. I’ve never heard of that, but I know it will be very useful for me and when I’m teaching. I want more practice identifying comma splices, run-ons, and using commas before FANBOYS. I know that I have a lot of mistakes with those so hopefully when we workshop I will be able to identify them and grow from the experience.

Question: I think it was on Tuesday that we touched very briefly on subjective and objective cases. But I don’t remember anything that was said besides the example sentence: Between _(you)___ and __(me)___. I got lost after that and have no idea what is the difference between subjective and objective. Can anyone help me? She also said something about not using “I” or “myself,” but I’m not sure what that was referring to?

The World of Word Class

Nouns, adjectives, verbs, adverbs, are words that I’ve known and heard before but this week it was really good to review them. It’s easy to just go through the motions of constructing sentences and not really think about the structure or the reason why things work together, or not. BUT since I haven’t been thinking about word classes when I’ve been writing for the past couple of years I have found that I’ve forgotten their usage and exact meanings.

I really liked learning the little “test sentences” that you could use in order to classify the parts of speech easier, for example when testing verbs; They want to______, It’s going to _______, or Please ________ (it). This is a neat tool to use because it can become very confusing trying to identify the word class. The most important thing to remember when trying to label words as verb, noun, etc., is that “you can only determine the word class in its context,” as Barbara says. A word can be an adverb in one sentence or a noun in another. It all matters on the placement. AND that’s why you can’t have set rules or a list of words that are always in the word class. The only two word classes that are closed and have a “non-growing” list of words is articles and prepositions.

Another thing I learned this week that was actually quite new for me, is parse, or the breakdown of sentences the example we used in class is Seth uses glitter pens tastefully. The subject is Seth. You can add modifiers in front of the subject but it still remains as the noun phrase. Then the verb phrase becomes uses glitter pens tastefully. The verb is uses. Something I didn’t understand is verb transitive (I’m still not very clear on it – see question below). I guess that verb transitive has to have a direct object being a noun or pronoun. It becomes a verb intransitive when you take away the noun, such as: Seth uses.

This is sort of a tangent but I really liked the How to Bartle Puzballs, exercise. It was a very unique way of demonstrating syntax and the way we can figure out the meaning of the sentences by knowing the parts of speech. I would definitely want to use an exercise like this in my class when I become a teacher.

Question for Barbara: Where did you get the Bartling Puzballs exercise and are there more of them? Maybe online or in a book?

Question: I am still very unclear about what verb transitive is and a verb intransitive and how you would identify each in context. So my question would be; does anyone have any tricks of identifying them or could someone explain what each with a different example than the one in class?

What I've learned...so far

The general theme of what I've learned this week is that grammar has a lot of gray areas. Yes, there are some definite things considered right or wrong, but there is plenty that is left up to INTERPRETATION, DEBATE, PERSONAL PREFERENCE.

By the end of this week though, I definitely feel much more adequate in the art of apostrophes. this is one of those "gray" areas in grammar, but i now know the choices of apostrophe placement. The trends are what tend to define the gray areas such as: leaving the "s" off of a possessive singular noun that ends in "s" for example: Curtis' trampoline is broken. It is growing ever popular to drop the second "s" and end it with an apostrophe. More traditional people or editors will still include the "s." Neither one is wrong it just depends on which is preferred.

A brand new apostrophe rule that I wasn't aware of was the "three syllable" rule. If the word ending in "s" has three or more syllables then you don't add an extra "s" you just end the word with an apostrophe, ex: Socrates'

What I thought was neat is the apostrophe's inserted for clarification. I've obviously seen this done in magazines, books, essays, but I never stopped to think about why it was done. Actually, I overlooked most of them. An example of this clarifying apostrophe is: The pro's had a dinner to celebrate the competition. By inserting an apostrophe it allows the reader to know exactly what's written without having to read the sentence/word several times to notice the actual word (ex. from packet: They said their I do's and M's), it could be mistaken as Ms. "so-and-so," which leads to the next gray area.

Apostrophes have another gray area when it comes to numbers or capital singular letters. When writing down dates (ex:1990s), you can either drop the apostrophe, or insert it (ex: 1990's), again both are correct. With capital letters (excluding M's) and acronyms the same option applies. You can write RSVP's or RSVPs. Personally I think any acronym with more than three letters should include an apostrophe. I feel like it looks more clean-cut and easier on the eye.

Geez, apostrophes sure leave a lot up to opinions. This can get very frustrating to students trying to learn nifty rules to memorize correct punctuations. It's not like math where you have a distinct right or wrong answer. I guess one thing that is necessary for someone deciding how to punctuate something is consistency. if you are going to drop the extra "s" on singular nouns ending with "s," than you better do it through out your whole piece. If the work is in a magazine than the editor should choose a way and stick to it. Consistency is a crucial ingredient when trying to tackle the gray areas.

The one thing I still wonder about is how to teach the gray areas to high school students? I like the way Barbara teaches it, but will high schools allow this or will they make you teach a certain way? Is it too confusing for high school students to know the gray areas, so we need to just pick one way and teach that?

Sorry that's a loaded question...

Self Analysis

I am usually pretty harsh on myself when I analyze my writing, or anything I do in general. It was actually difficult for me to pinpoint just three things to work on because I feel like I have so much to improve upon! So instead of going crazy and picking a million things I choose one thing from my professor’s comments, which is passive voice, one thing from my mom (who I have look over my stuff as well), confusion of “then” and “than,” and one thing from myself, which is commas.

Let’s start with the nasty passive voice problem. I was first diagnosed with the passive voice virus in my journalism class. Everything was required to be straight forward and to the point. I enjoy creative writing and fictional writing so for some reason I thought passive voice was going to ruin the “creative” side of me. I understand now that being more direct actually allows creativity because once you state your ideas clearly it’s easier to add detail.

Instead of saying, “Sarah walked to the store dodging puddles in her high heels,” I would say, “The puddles were dodged by Sarah’s high heels as she walked to the store.” I think both are fine but the first is direct while the second one is passive. Even as I write this I’m not confident that my explanation is correct so obviously I need some serious work in this department.

It’s hard for me to fix something in passive voice or to catch them on my own. I can tell its passive voice if someone points it out to me, but if I’m just reading over my work I usually overlook it.

The next thing I want to work on is, knowing when to use “then” and “than.” This is a problem that is easier to fix because it simply comes down to my editing skills. I need to slow down when I’m writing or editing and be more conscious of what I’m doing. I know that “then” is used as an indicator of time and “than” is used when comparing something (ex: Mark is better than Sally.)

Now I’ll move to commas. Using commas is not something I feel confident in. I often find myself throwing in commas when a sentence looks too long or the flow isn’t right. I don’t know any of the rules for placement I just go off what I feel is correct or incorrect. Sometimes I will place them correctly, but there is no method to my madness and often times I misplace them.

From my analysis I have three things to work on. Distinguishing when to use “then” and “than” is definitely important, but I feel like I know how I just need to be more aware of what I’m writing. The two that I really hope to learn more about and understand is the use of commas and identifying/fixing sentences written in passive voice. If I can grasp these two concepts then I will definitely be able to improve my writing.